Completeness of Digital Accessible Knowledge of the Plants of Ghana

Asase, Alex; Peterson, A. Townsend

doi:10.17161/bi.v11i0.5860

Cited by 17 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Biases vary between different data sources and even between different natural history collections [ 6 ]. Records are often more concentrated in more accessible localities, for example near to roads [ 57 ]. In our study we found different relative geographical biases between occurrence record types.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contrasting spatial, temporal and environmental patterns in observation and specimen based species occurrence data

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Species occurrence data records the location and time of an encounter with a species, and is valuable for many aspects of ecological and evolutionary analyses. A key distinction within species occurrence data is between (1) collected and preserved specimens that can be taxonomically validated (i.e., natural history collections), and (2) observations, which are more error prone but richer in terms of number and spread of observations. In this study we analyse the distribution in temporal, spatial, taxonomic and environmental coverage of specimen- and observation based species occurrence data for land plants in Norway, a region with strong climatic and human population density gradients. Of 4.8 million species occurrence records, the majority (78%) were observations. However, there was a greater species richness in the specimen record (N = 4691) than in the observation record (N = 3193) and most species were recorded more as specimens than observations. Specimen data was on average older, and collected later during the year. Both record types were highly influenced by a small number of prolific contributors. The species most highly represented in the observation data set were widespread or invasive, while in the specimen records, taxonomically challenging species were overrepresented. Species occurrence records were unevenly spatially distributed. Both specimen and observation records were concentrated in regions of Norway with high human population density and with high temperatures and precipitation, but in different regions within Norway. Observation and specimen records thus differ in taxonomic, temporal, spatial and environmental coverage for a well-sampled group and study region, potentially influencing the ecological inferences made from studies utilizing species occurrence data. The distribution of observation data dominates the dataset, so inferences of species diversity and distributions do not correspond to the evolutionary or physiological knowledge of species, which is based on specimen data. We make recommendations for users of biodiversity data, and collectors to better exploit the complementary strengths of these distinct biodiversity data types.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contrasting spatial, temporal and environmental patterns in observation and specimen based species occurrence data

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A next logical step will be to undertake data gap analyses, to identify discrepancies between current ideas and the state of the entire biodiversity science enterprise in Ghana. An analysis of completeness of digital accessible knowledge exists for the plants of Ghana (Asase and Peterson, 2016), but completeness of digital accessible knowledge for other taxa has not been assessed. This study illustrates how assessing biodiversity data holdings and user data needs can be used to strategize for biodiversity data mobilization, data publication, and data use activities, for a country and/or for a taxon.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Information that is shared and accessible has the potential to impact science and conservation, as well as the care and curation of specimens (Asase and Peterson, 2016). Barriers to sharing biodiversity data could be psychological and behavioral (including legal barriers), or may relate to describing information and data, or may spring from inadequate strategies and resources.…”

Section: Biodiversity Data Mobilization Landscapementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Secondary biodiversity data, such as species atlases and range maps from field guides, often include subjective elements that reduce their utility when compared to primary biodiversity data. As such, primary biodiversity data have many applications: documenting basic biodiversity patterns (Guralnick and Hill, 2009), identifying priority areas for conservation efforts (Myers et al, 2000), providing baseline information for detection of biotic change (Peterson et al, 2015), and supporting modeling efforts that anticipate biotic responses to local and global change (Ehrlen and Morris, 2015).Sources of primary biodiversity data are many, including labels associated with specimens in research collections of natural history museums and herbaria, and data from field studies and ASASE AND SCHWINGER -GHANA BIODIVERSITY INFORMATICS ACTIVITY observations made by scientists and researchers (Peterson et al, 2011), as well as data from field observations made by citizen scientists (Asase and Peterson, 2016). Types of primary biodiversity data include primary occurrence data that document presence (and absence) of organisms such as those on labels on herbarium sheets (Peterson et al, 2011); sample-based data that have information on species occurrence and their abundance, such as those from ecological plot inventories; and multimedia data such as sound, images and videos.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Certainly, past decades have witnessed massive progress in digitization of biodiversity data thanks to advances in information technology, development of efficient data digitization workflows, and changes in policies of owners of primary biodiversity data (Asase and Peterson, 2016). Biodiversity data digitization and sharing of natural history collections include several stages: pre-digitization preparation, advance curation, image capture, processing and storage, capture of data records from either images or specimens, georeferencing, data cleaning, and data publication (Nelson et al, 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Assessment of biodiversity data holdings and user data needs for Ghana

Asase

Schwinger²

2018

Biodiv. Inf.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.-Data on biodiversity are important to addressing the challenges of sustainable development, and for decision-making about natural resources and environments. Biodiversity information, when mobilized and shared openly, has the potential to impact science and conservation positively. However, biodiversity data mobilization is expensive, such that data mobilization and sharing activities must be prioritized to meet the needs of the user community. In this study, we undertook a detailed assessment of biodiversity data holdings and user needs in Ghana through semi-structured questionnaire interviews, and focus-group discussions in the form of a workshop. Most biodiversity data-holding organizations were at preliminary stages of digital biodiversity data mobilization and sharing. Taxonomic, checklist, and geographic data on plants and animals were identified as most needed. Priority thematic needs were as regards protected areas, invasive alien species, threatened species, economic species (timber and non-timber forest products), and pathogens and diseases. Human and infrastructural capacities, and sustainable coordination were identified as the major challenges to biodiversity data management. This study provides a detailed case study of how assessing biodiversity data holdings and user data needs can be used to strategize biodiversity data mobilization, data publication, and data use activities.Key words.-biodiversity, primary biodiversity data, data mobilization, digitization, Ghana Biological diversity may be defined as the full variation of living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine, and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are a part. This term thus includes diversity within species, between species, and of ecosystems (CBD, 2001). It includes genetic diversity, species diversity, ecosystem diversity, and associated evolutionary and ecological processes. Biodiversity is a compound word derived from biological diversity, and therefore is considered to have the same meaning. Biodiversity is important for human wellbeing: it provides tangible benefits, such as food, clothing, and shelter, as well as intangible benefits such as climate amelioration and clean water (Brauman et al., 2007). However, biodiversity is being lost at unprecedented rates owing to a plethora of factors: deforestation, agricultural expansion, habitat loss, timber extraction, firewood collection, and mineral extraction (Norris et al., 2010). Data on biodiversity are crucial to addressing the challenges of sustainable development and decision-making about natural resources and environments (Chapman, 2005;Sousa-Baena et al., 2013).Biodiversity data include data on species inventories, distributions, images, sounds, specimens, and ecological interactions, as well as descriptions of datasets (i.e., metadata) (Costello et al., 2013). Biodiversity data are basically of two kinds (i.e., primary and secondary), and can be numerical, categorical (e.g., species or place names), or ...

show abstract

A new model for efficient, need‐driven progress in generating primary biodiversity information resources

Asase

Sainge²,

Radji

et al. 2020

Appl Plant Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biological diversity is distributed unevenly worldwide, with wellknown biogeographic patterns such as the latitudinal diversity gradient (Mannion et al., 2014), in which the tropics hold many more species than higher-latitude regions. Other examples of such uneven distribution of biological diversity include the existence of centers of endemism and so-called "hotspots" of biodiversity (Myers et al., 2000). These imbalances are, for whatever reasons, often correlated (if not causally) with differences in wealth, in which the wealthy, so-called Global North is relatively biodiversity-poor, whereas the so-called Global South is often biodiversity-rich and economically poor (Balmford et al., 2005;Rands et al., 2010). A third dimension of this equation centers on the geographic distribution of biodiversity data worldwide. As with global wealth, this commodity tends to be concentrated in the Global North and to be relatively sparse and rare in tropical countries. The reasons behind this unequal distribution of information have to do with histories of occupation and colonization (Peterson et al., 2016a), as well as with histories of science and its development largely in the Global North, at least until relatively recently (Collen et al., 2008).The field of biodiversity informatics has developed rapidly in recent years, with the appearance of important and exciting new tools for analyzing and interpreting biodiversity data. These tools, when

show abstract

Completeness of Digital Accessible Knowledge of the Plants of Ghana

Cited by 17 publications

References 19 publications

Contrasting spatial, temporal and environmental patterns in observation and specimen based species occurrence data

Contrasting spatial, temporal and environmental patterns in observation and specimen based species occurrence data

Assessment of biodiversity data holdings and user data needs for Ghana

A new model for efficient, need‐driven progress in generating primary biodiversity information resources

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About